BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom House of Lords Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom House of Lords Decisions >> John Walker, one of the Bailies of Edinburgh, James Stuart, Thomas Hogg, Wm. Gibson, Councillors, and Others v. George Drummond, Esq., Lord Provost, and Others, the Magistrates and Town Councillors of the City of Edinburgh [1764] UKHL 6_Paton_761 (13 March 1764) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1764/6_Paton_761.html Cite as: [1764] UKHL 6_Paton_761 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Page: 761↓
(1764) 6 Paton 761
CASES DECIDED IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS, UPON APPEAL FROM THE COURTS OF SCOTLAND.
No. 134
House of Lords,
Subject_Patronage of the City Churches. —
The rights of presentation to the parish churches of the city of Edinburgh belong to the Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Town Council, as patrons thereof; and the Presbytery of Edinburgh, by their several Kirk Sessions, has no voice in the election or presentation to any vacancies in the parish churches within the city.
The respondents are the patrons of, and have the right of presentation to all the parishes within the city of Edinburgh; and, on a vacancy occurring in 1762, in one of the city churches, they gave a presentation to Mr Drysdale to the vacant benefice.
The appellants brought a suspension and interdict; and
Page: 762↓
It was answered, that it was true that an agreement of the nature described had been gone into; but finding that it led to the very evils which it was meant to prevent, a reduction in 1739 was brought of that agreement; and the Lords of Council and Session, after considerable discussion, reduced the same, and found and declared “the Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Town Council of Edinburgh, to have the only right of presenting ministers to all the vacant churches built, or to be built, within the city.”
Feb. 18, 1763.
The Lord Ordinary pronounced this interlocutor:
“Having considered the minutes of debate, &c., finds that the Magistrates and Town Council of Edinburgh, have the sole privilege, exclusive of, and without consulting the ministers and kirk-sessions, of presenting ministers to all the vacant churches within the city of Edinburgh; and therefore repels the reasons of reduction with respect to that point, assoilzies the defenders in the reduction, and decerns. But with respect to the proceedings of the Town Council, with regard to the presentation of Mr John Drysdale, before answer, appoints the chargers to give in answers to the suspenders' condescendence.”
July 1, 1763.
July 15, 1763.
After several representations to the Lord Ordinary, who adhered, a reclaiming petition was presented to the Court, and the Lords unanimously adhered; and thereafter ordered a special condescendence to be given in; whereupon, and after considering this condescendence, the Lords pronounced this interlocutor:
“Repel the reasons of suspension, and reduction of the presentation granted to Mr John Drysdale, find the letters orderly proceeded with, assoilzie the defenders from the reduction and declarator. Find no expenses due, and decern.”
Against these interlocutors the present appeal was brought to the House of Lords.
After hearing counsel,
It was ordered and adjudged, that the interlocutors complained of be, and the same are hereby, affirmed.
Page: 763↓
Counsel: For the Appellants,
C. Yorke,
R. Mackintosh.
For the Respondents,
Fl. Norton,
Alex. Wedderburn.
